Is this actually a thing? I've just been ignoring it on the assumption that it was just another in the seemingly endless right-wing whine fest over nothing. I figured some day they'd actually have a real reason to biatch, though, so is this it?

If the requirement for tax-free status is being a non-profit, non-political group working for social justice, and you don't have unlimited time or funds, which of the following would you look at more closely:

skozlaw:Is this actually a thing? I've just been ignoring it on the assumption that it was just another in the seemingly endless right-wing whine fest over nothing. I figured some day they'd actually have a real reason to biatch, though, so is this it?

Oh, it's a thing. A pretty bad thing. Take heart, though, Obama is reacting appropriately, recognizing that it is indeed a thing.

See, it really undermines my own personal concern for this scandal when apples and oranges are compared. Tea party groups were put to particular scrutiny in Ohio, DC, and California. None of the examples in the article are from those regions.

It wasn't a nationwide scandal, and pretending it was seriously undermines the credibility of the concerns. It just makes it look like they're trying to blame Obama, instead of those at fault.

getting my laughs out of the way at what is sure to be an epic liberal ass hurty thread that basically boils down to: when my guy does it, it's fine & i just mock anyone who says otherwise or feign disinterest.

One has a "taxed enough already" theme and the other type thinks everyone should pay their fair share. Wonder which one would more likely being trying to cheat the government out of tax payments.

Doesn't change the fact the the IRS has to be independent of the Executive branch.

Also doesn't change the fact that the GOP won't care and will send it's hatchet Congress Critters out to lie through their teeth about how this is all Obama and add it to the long list of impeachment offenses.

inner ted:getting my laughs out of the way at what is sure to be an epic liberal ass hurty thread that basically boils down to: when my guy does it, it's fine & i just mock anyone who says otherwise or feign disinterest.

should be a blast

Because all accusations are equally valid and true, and no scrutiny should be applied?

ikanreed:See, it really undermines my own personal concern for this scandal when apples and oranges are compared. Tea party groups were put to particular scrutiny in Ohio, DC, and California. None of the examples in the article are from those regions.

It wasn't a nationwide scandal, and pretending it was seriously undermines the credibility of the concerns. It just makes it look like they're trying to blame Obama, instead of those at fault.

From what I've been hearing on the news, those offices are where they process the applications. These offices often serve the entire country with one function, rather than performing many functions for one region. For example, even though I drive past the IRS' HQ on my way home from work every day, I mail my Federal return to Massachusetts.

ikanreed:See, it really undermines my own personal concern for this scandal when apples and oranges are compared. Tea party groups were put to particular scrutiny in Ohio, DC, and California. None of the examples in the article are from those regions.

It wasn't a nationwide scandal, and pretending it was seriously undermines the credibility of the concerns. It just makes it look like they're trying to blame Obama, instead of those at fault.

skozlaw:Is this actually a thing? I've just been ignoring it on the assumption that it was just another in the seemingly endless right-wing whine fest over nothing. I figured some day they'd actually have a real reason to biatch, though, so is this it?

Being treated differently by a government entity because of your speech? Nah, not a thing to be concerned with at all. Move along citizen.

inner ted:getting my laughs out of the way at what is sure to be an epic liberal ass hurty thread that basically boils down to: when my guy does it, it's fine & i just mock anyone who says otherwise or feign disinterest.

should be a blast

Or, you might learn that the poor widdle opwessed Tea-per Tantrum Party groups weren't even half of those audited by the IRS, and the conservatives -- *surprise* -- are just trying to play victim to rack up sympathy points with the idiot voters.

But, I see you've invested heavily in this pity party, and I'd hate to bring it down with something like the truth. Please, put that crown of thorns back on, and don't take those nails out of your feet on my account.

ExpressPork:skozlaw: Is this actually a thing? I've just been ignoring it on the assumption that it was just another in the seemingly endless right-wing whine fest over nothing. I figured some day they'd actually have a real reason to biatch, though, so is this it?

Being treated differently by a government entity because of your speech? Nah, not a thing to be concerned with at all. Move along citizen.

Instead of updating the 50-year-old IRS regulations regarding how to tell whether a social welfare group is legit or a sham, Congress and the IRS's appointed leaders let a completely new campaign finance environment post-Citizens United v. FEC render those regulations completely irrelevant.

Yeah, that was the line that caught my eye, too. Doesn't really fill me with confidence.

By the way, speaking of being Taxed Enough Already, I've been waiting with bated breath for the Fark thread about the CBO report showing that the federal budget deficit is decreasing at a shocking rate and the national debt has stabilized for the foreseeable future. I'm sure the usual suspects will be there to admit that they've been wrong all this time, and that federal fiscal policy seems to be working.

Due to budget cuts and just sheer numbers, the IRS has come up with a series of markers that help determine who may be fudging numbers.If you claim the home office deduction, that really pumps up your likelihood of a second look.Could someone have decided that putting TEA Party in your title increases the chances you are a cheat? With the 25% rejection rate, it seems so.

The real scandal is that all of those 540(c)'s (or whatever they are) aren't investigated. Karl Rove's, Obama's, and many more of those should exist.

BMulligan:By the way, speaking of being Taxed Enough Already, I've been waiting with bated breath for the Fark thread about the CBO report showing that the federal budget deficit is decreasing at a shocking rate and the national debt has stabilized for the foreseeable future. I'm sure the usual suspects will be there to admit that they've been wrong all this time, and that federal fiscal policy seems to be working.

You know how that thread's going to develop -- they'll claim credit for all the good outcomes, and pull an alternate fictional history out of their ass where an unchecked Obama would have ruined everything.

Debeo Summa Credo:skozlaw: Is this actually a thing? I've just been ignoring it on the assumption that it was just another in the seemingly endless right-wing whine fest over nothing. I figured some day they'd actually have a real reason to biatch, though, so is this it?

ExpressPork:skozlaw: Is this actually a thing? I've just been ignoring it on the assumption that it was just another in the seemingly endless right-wing whine fest over nothing. I figured some day they'd actually have a real reason to biatch, though, so is this it?

Being treated differently by a government entity because of your speech? Nah, not a thing to be concerned with at all. Move along citizen.

Try again. Being treated differently by a government entity because your speech indicates that you are likely to not abide by the laws the government entity is tasked with enforcing? There, nothing to be concerned with at all. Move along, patriot derper.

Yeah, that was the line that caught my eye, too. Doesn't really fill me with confidence.

By the way, speaking of being Taxed Enough Already, I've been waiting with bated breath for the Fark thread about the CBO report showing that the federal budget deficit is decreasing at a shocking rate and the national debt has stabilized for the foreseeable future. I'm sure the usual suspects will be there to admit that they've been wrong all this time, and that federal fiscal policy seems to be working.

Umm. Thank you sequester?

I'm pretty sure the CBO report said that it was because of a stronger-than-expected economy that led to larger-than-expected federal revenues. You want to make the argument that the sequester strengthened the economy, be my guest.

ikanreed:See, it really undermines my own personal concern for this scandal when apples and oranges are compared. Tea party groups were put to particular scrutiny in Ohio, DC, and California. None of the examples in the article are from those regions.

It wasn't a nationwide scandal, and pretending it was seriously undermines the credibility of the concerns. It just makes it look like they're trying to blame Obama, instead of those at fault.

That's what this is, another attempt to create some bullshiat "scandal" out of nothing. It's like the WWF in the 1980s, throw concepts at the wall and see what sticks. That's why we had ULTIMATE WARRIOR and not Duke "The Dumpster" as the main challenger for Hogan. Or the reason Isaac Yakem, DDS never took off as the challenger for the belt.

The GOP is basically Vince McMahon right now in 1993. The is the Friar Ferguson stage of scandal right now.

Or maybe the Bastion Booger of Scandals.

If they are lucky, the next "scandal" will be like "The Booty Man" and shake it's rump at Obama's presidency

Muta:The IRS gives churches a free pass. Where is the outrage regarding this?

This. If it really was about targeting conservative groups the IRS would have biatch slapped the 1100 pastors who went out of their way to denounce Obama from the pulpit and dared them to yank their status.

inner ted:getting my laughs out of the way at what is sure to be an epic liberal ass hurty thread that basically boils down to: when my guy does it, it's fine & i just mock anyone who says otherwise or feign disinterest.

should be a blast

SPOT ON! And so predictableShould be fun watching it too...// popcorn and a drink

Lionel Mandrake:I don't think the IRS was too hard on the TP groups. They were too easy on the other groups.

The vast majority of these groups deserve nothing in tax breaks, regardless of ideology.

You are probably right from a conceptual standpoint, but the law is the law, and whether they were "too hard" on conservative groups or "too easy" on liberal groups it's still egregiously discriminatory.

My question is how much tax revenue are we talking here? Most of these groups are 501(c)4s, donations to which aren't tax deductible. What taxes are they avoiding? Income taxes on interest from their bank accounts? Property taxes on their owned premises? What?

phaseolus:BMulligan: By the way, speaking of being Taxed Enough Already, I've been waiting with bated breath for the Fark thread about the CBO report showing that the federal budget deficit is decreasing at a shocking rate and the national debt has stabilized for the foreseeable future. I'm sure the usual suspects will be there to admit that they've been wrong all this time, and that federal fiscal policy seems to be working.

You know how that thread's going to develop -- they'll claim credit for all the good outcomes, and pull an alternate fictional history out of their ass where an unchecked Obama would have ruined everything.

No, that's not possible. I'm sure that none of the honorable conservatives around here would ever...

Muta:I was reading complaints from Teabaggers that the form they had to fill out had 55 questions. Can you imagine having to answer a whole 55 questions just to gain tax free status for your organization?

Given the fervent opposition to reading the Affordable Care Act, since it's so long (I mean, it didn't have the breezy fun that all of Ayn Rand's literature exudes), the GOP needs to add to its agenda next time the following: "Reading's hard."

Debeo Summa Credo:skozlaw: Is this actually a thing? I've just been ignoring it on the assumption that it was just another in the seemingly endless right-wing whine fest over nothing. I figured some day they'd actually have a real reason to biatch, though, so is this it?

Oh, it's a thing. A pretty bad thing. Take heart, though, Obama is reacting appropriately, recognizing that it is indeed a thing.

Where would you place it on the scandal scale where Iran-Contra is a gnat-buzzing annoyance and Benghazi is a giant asteroid striking the earth?

Unfortunately, an enormous unethical "cheating" culture has enveloped the current "command economy" government regime, and there is now an enormous backlash that is beginning to seek out balance between the two economic polarities. The IRS effectively altered election results through harassment methods. IRS "operatives," so to speak, working directly in tacit agreement with the Obama campaign, worked as thoroughly as possible (while on taxpayers' dimes) to divert resources and money away from conservative efforts to encourage citizens for the conservative causes and candidates. There's really no two ways about it. that's what was done. End of story.

I_C_Weener:Epoch_Zero: Liberal groups usually aren't a threat to the very existence of the country.

I wish I had the physical ability you have to carry that cross. You must be muscled like Conan.

Dear Lord, you don't even know what it means to "carry that cross". Did Epoch indicate that he was being persecuted? No. He was indicating that conservatives are primarily evil assholes hell-bent on destroying this country to elevate their theocratic platform.

Debeo Summa Credo:Lionel Mandrake: I don't think the IRS was too hard on the TP groups. They were too easy on the other groups.

The vast majority of these groups deserve nothing in tax breaks, regardless of ideology.

You are probably right from a conceptual standpoint, but the law is the law, and whether they were "too hard" on conservative groups or "too easy" on liberal groups it's still egregiously discriminatory.

My question is how much tax revenue are we talking here? Most of these groups are 501(c)4s, donations to which aren't tax deductible. What taxes are they avoiding? Income taxes on interest from their bank accounts? Property taxes on their owned premises? What?

I think the real goal is being able to hide their donor's information.